HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ex.Klingeman Lot5-Promontory.1976
Recorded at 1:10PM October 26, 1979 Loretta Banner Recorder
Reception nO.
21.9059
0001<318. PAcEl??
STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION FROM THE
DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION
WHEREAS, the applicant, PAUL KLINGEMAN, is the
owner of the following described real property situate in
the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado:
Lot 5, Promontory
Subdivision
and,
WHEREAS, there is presently constructed upon the
property above-described a duplex consisting of a four bed-
room, two bath unit and a one bedroom, one bath unit; and,
.
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested an exemption
from the definition of a subdivision for the purposes of
subdividing the existing duplex through condominiumization;
and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
at its meeting held August 24, 1976, determined that an exemp-
tion from the definition of a subdivision was appropriate
in the circumstances and recommended that the same be granted;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of Aspen, Colorado, at
its meeting held October 9, 1979, and upon the recommenda-
tion of the Planning and Zoning Commission aforesaid, deter-
mined that the application of PAUL KLINGEMAN met the
requirements of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and
that, accordingly the subdivision of the existing duplex
through condominiumization is not within the intent and pur-
pose of Chapter 20 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of Aspen, Colorado,
does hereby determine that the proposed subdivision through
the condominiumization of the duplex situate upon Lot 5,
Promontory Subdivision, pitkin County, Colorado, is not
BDOK378 PAcE178
within the intent and purpose of Chapter 20 of the Municipal
Code of the City of Aspen and does, therefore, grant an
exemption from the definition of a subdivision for the pur-
poses aforesaid;
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the grant of the foregoing
exemption shall be subject to and conditioned upon compli-
ance with the provisions of the Municipal Code of the City
of Aspen, as said Code read on August 24, 1976, except that
Applicant shall not be required to pay a park dedication fee.
DATED:
1/-/~
Mayor
I, KATHRYN S. KOCH, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Statement of Exemption from the Definition of a
Subdivision was considered and approved by the Aspen City
Council at its regular meeting held October 9, 1979, at
which time the Mayor was authorized to execute the same on
behalf of the City of Aspen.
/11r~)../ ~A _.-
K hryn S. Koch
'-'\1',
r~.~ I. .(" P )
. ...~::.,
. Fl.....,.
.{ ~J )~f"
.( "I' C't .
""' "J .
. ~.4
-'.,,:~'
"....r,~ .
. :JC
,
\1"\ ","
.\ \.\J
2.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Planning Commission
FROM:
Planning Staff (BK)
RE:
Klingeman Subdivision Exemption
DATE:
August 12, 1976
Application is being made for subdivision exemption for the
Klingeman duplex on Lot 5 of the Promontory Subdivision. This
dwelling is located at the intersection of Hopkins Street and
Midland Avenue. The City Engineer has no comment and no further
design requirements would be served by requiring full subdivision
at this time with the exception of the subdivision parks dedication
fee.
We recommend approval of the request with the understanding that the
dedication fee be paid.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
David Ellis
FROM:
Planning Staff (HC)
RE:
Klingeman Subdivision Exemption - Duplex on Lot 5
Promontory Subdivision
DATE:
July 28, 1976
This is a request for subdivision exemption by Paul Klingeman to
condominiumize a duplex on Lot 5, Promontory Subdivision.
We have scheduled this for P & Z review on August 17, 1976.
Please haveeyour comments to the Pilaning Office by August 12, 1976.
Thank you.
P.S. Do you feel it to be appropriate to require a survey before you
review?
""'.
~ __ I -
,
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION
FROM SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
Pursuant to Section 20-l0 of Chapter 20 of the Municipal
Code of the City of Aspen, Paul M. Klingeman and Pamela M.
Klingeman (hereinafter collectively referred to as applicant)
hereby apply for an exemption from the definition of the term
"Subdivision" with respect to the real property described as:
LOT 5, Promontory Subdivision,
City and Townsite of Aspen,
Pitkin County, Colorado.
The applicant submits that the exemption in this case would
be appropriate for the following reasons:
1) The application involves subdivision of an existing
duplex. The owners of the separate portion of the duplex
structure will own the common elements of the duplex-condominium
as tenants in common. Said common elements shall not be
subject to partition. The applicant will, at condominium-
ization, file a declaration with the Pitkin County Clerk &
Recorder which will state that the land use impact of the
property will not be increased over its present use by virtue
of said condominiumization.
2) The applicant submits that such an exemption in the
instant case would not conflict with the intent and purpose of
the subdivision regulations which are directed to assist, among
other things, orderly, efficient and integrated development of
the City of Aspen; to insure the proper distribution of popula-
tion; to coordinate the need for public services; and to
encourage well planned subdivision. They are directed to
considerations of subdivision design and improvements and to
restrict such building where it is inappropriate after
considering its land use impact. The duplex presently exists
and its impact upon the aforementioned requirement will not be
increased in any way by its condominiumization.
'.
3) Pursuant to the provisions of Section 20-l0 (c) of
the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, a property which is
being condominiumized shall be exempt from the definition of
subdivision as set forth in Section 20-2 (c) of the code as
long as said property "fulfills all pertinent design
requirements contined in Section 20-7 of this chapter. The
duplex which is the subject of this application fulfills all
pertinent design requirements contained in Section 20-7.
It is the contention of the applicant that the granting
of an exemption to the subdivision regulations is proper in
the situation and is indeed required by Section 20-10 (c)
of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen. The applicant
would appreciate your consideration of this application at your
next regular meeting.
SLEMON, MAZZA & LaSALLE, P.C.
Dated
t
....""'-
'" ,11
....-w
MEMORANDUt1
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Richard Grice, Planning Office
RE: Klingman - Subdivision
DATE: October 1, 1979
The attached application requests subdivision exemption for the condominiumization of
an existing duplex located in the R-6 zone district on Lot 5 of the Promontory Subdivision.
The dwelling is located at the intersection of Hopkins Street and Midland Avenue.
The history of this application is that it was orginally filed with the Planning Office
in the summer of 1976. Records indicate that Hal Clark of the Planning Office took the
application before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on August 24, 1976. At that
time, the P & Z recommended approval subject to the payment of a Park Dedication Fee.
Subsequently, the City Council records do not indicate that this application was ever
reviewed. We have discussed the problem with the applicant, Paul Klingman and his
attorney, Tony Mazza, each of whom were of the opinion that the application was taken
to City Council. Shortly after the Planning and Zoning Commission's approval, Hal Clark
resigned from the Planning Office and was not replaced until the following spring.
In summary, we don't really know why this application never received approval from City
Council. It seems reasonable to assume that the fault lies at least 50% with the City
Staff as there was a staff change. The Planning Office recommends that you approve the
subdivision exemption subject to the payment of a Park Dedication Fee in accordance with
the la~ls in effect as of August 1976. b l L
~r:~\\~ ,
~~~. \~
-,
,
'")I;;"...""...
-..
""II. .'
.. ~,.,,:S
""~ -,:i
... ~'_ J'
~
. _ ...,.,. '._-.,.#_ __....~,JA... _ '
.~. '
_.__.'i._' .
" .
>,~~,---._.
...-..
......-..,.
-,......_..._._,.">..-~...~
-a......,_
_._~,.__......'.....::...-
.-...-.. .......~~
1
~
-,'~"
~,ei
7/ z.- '1
------
MEMORANj)UM
TO:
David Ellis
FROM:
Planning Staff (He)
RE:
Klingeman Subdivision Exemption - Duplex on Lot 5
Promontory Subdivision
DATE:
July 28, 1976
This is a request for subdivision exemption by Paul Klingeman to
condominiumize a duplex on Lot 5, Promontory Suhdivision.
We have scheduled this for P Eo Z review on August 17, 1976.
Please have your comments to the Planning Office by August 12, 1976.
Thank you.
P.S. Do you feel it to be appropriate to require a survey before you
review?
~
1\1"\76 -
Harry Shaw
Ann-Farrish
Motion
Episcopal Church
Hearing--Cond. Use
I
1-
!
Klingman Subdivi-
sion
I
I_
:1.
Motion
!
. "
I
I
I
I
L
i
Aspen Main Subdi-
vision
,
l
~ -
.i
,
~
.J
,
1
,
Motion
Harr"y Shcn';, a property owner on Main St., asked what pro-
tection he had as a property owner when the present mem-
bers of the HPC were no longer in office. Norm Burns
explained that the IlPC heed guidelines to follow, regard-
less of who the members -were at any specific time.
Shaw further stated that he felt the designation should be
on an individual basis. lie questioned the integrity of fu-
ture members on the COmmittee. Larry Groen clarified the
requirements for an HPC member.
John Stanford said that any owner has recourse to the City
Council if he does not want his property historically des-
ignated. He is also entitled to a public hearing.
Chairman Collins added that the historic district would
give seme b~lance to the density and impacts of uses on
Main Street. The a-Office Zone parking requirements keep
the balance viable.
Ann Farrish sald that there was a mistaken notion that
the color of a house that was historically designated coul
be dictated by the HPC. Stanford confirmed that color is
not an issue.
Hans Gramiger repeated that he believed if the project were
accomplished on an individual"basis, more would be gained
in the area of public relations.
Collins closed the public hearing.
The Con~ission discussed their views on the historic dist--
rict, and Collins entertained a motion to recommend to
City Council, jointly with the HPC, the establishment of
the Main Street Historic District, in the manner proposed
as given in the resolution, and for the reasons cited in
the resolution presented.
Hunt so moved, seconded by Kienast. Roll call vote:
Kienast, aye; Hunt, aye; Abbott, no; Hedstrom, aye;
Schuhmacher, aye; Collins, aye. Motion approved.
Hal Clark said that the Planning Office recommends settina
a public hearing for the conditional use of the Episcopal
Church expansion. Roger Hunt moved to set the hearing for
September 21, 1976. Danny Abbott seconded. All in favor,
motion approved.
Klingman Subdivision Exemption
Clark recommended granting the exemption. There were no
public comments. Hunt moved to grant the Klingman
Duplex exemption form subdivision regulations. The Subdivi
sion is not exempt from the park dedication fee. Abbott
seconded. All in favor , motion carried.
Aspen Main Subdivision Preliminary Plat
Clark said that this is a 6 unit structure on Main St.,
next to the Original Curve Apartments. The City Engineer'
comments were mainly technical in nature. Planning could
find no basis for denial. When Council reviewed the con-
ceptual plat, an economic feasibility study was required.
This has been submitted by the developer, Bayard Hovdesver
with the estimated cost of $50,000.00 per unit. The devel
oper also has agreed to a 6 month lease provision.
Roger Hunt moved to approve the preliminary plat of the
Aspen Main Subdivision, conditioned upon the comments of
the City Engineer dated August 10, and further conditioned
upon the 6 month minimum lease provision. Kienast secondo
All in favor, motion carried.
-4-